Introduction

This document is a short primer on materialist feminism, also called Marxist Feminism.
‘Materialist’, in this context, refers to the position that the analysis of material social relations
(broadly, relations between “social groups”), the division of “societies” into classes and the
struggle between and among those classes should be our starting point for understanding any
historical phenomenon. This takes the form of the application of the Marxist-Leninist
methodology of dialectical materialism (defined in the glossary and questions below) to the
study of patriarchy, and the use of this scientific Theory in organising against patriarchal
oppression and ultimately against capitalism.

This primer contains a number of sections aiming at introducing Marxist or materialist feminism
to an audience more used to using intersectional feminism or ‘social justice’ politics to analyse
issues like women’s oppression, homophobia and cissexism. The Glossary defines some key
terms used throughout this piece (with a link to a ​Great Soviet Encyclopedia ​article where
available) that you can refer to while you read the answers in the FAQ section, that introduce
the materialist position on some important questions in gender struggles today. The final section
is called ‘Further Reading’ and it provides links to some very important (but short and
easy-to-read) texts in Marxist Feminism.

Glossary

Class ​- A class is any social group that has a particular, well-defined relation to production (see
Production​). There are three classes under capitalism who ‘bring’ different aspects to
production: capitalists (who provide capital; this term refers to the money invested in the
process of production in the form of raw materials and instruments of production), proletarians
(otherwise known as workers; who provide labour) and landlords (who provide land). Each class
has a specific means of subsistence (simply, way of earning its living) and these are: profits,
wages and rent, respectively. Capitalist as a class (rather than individual capitalists) are referred
to as the (haute) bourgeoisie. Capitalists are defined by owning capital and those that own a
small amount are referred to as the petit-bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie as class can also be
referred to with the term ‘capital’, which it is in some places in this text.

Dialectical materialism ​- Dialectical materialism is Marxist-Leninist philosophy and it is the

method which we apply to our scientific work in historical materialism (see ​Historical
Materialism​). A more elaborate definition can be found in the FAQ.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry:
http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Dialectic_Materialism

Feminism - ​Feminism refers to the political means by which particular groups oppose
themselves to patriarchal oppression. There is bourgeois feminism, or feminism as it takes form
among the bourgeoisie (capitalists as a class), and Marxist/materialist feminism, which bases
itself in wider Marxist-Leninist political practice in uniting the proletariat (working class) and the
oppressed nations against capitalism. There is also petit-bourgeois feminism but this represents
a form of political action that vacillates between the positions of the other two kinds of feminism.

Historical materialism ​- Historical materialism is the science of the development of social

formations (see​ Social Formation​). It is the science which we practice in order to inform our
political work as Marxist-Leninists.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry:
http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Historical_Materialism

Ideology ​- Ideology can be looked at two ways. It can refer to one of the aspects of a social
formation (see ​Social Formation​) and this is the aspect that contains its ‘ideas’: its culture, art,
systems of philosophy, religious systems and so on. It can also be contrasted with science (see
Science​) and here it refers to ‘ideas’ that are taken up and shaped in order to suit a particular
practical purpose rather than to produce objective knowledge.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Ideology

Labour process - ​A labour process is another way of looking at a process of production and it
refers to the way that labour is ‘put to use’ in a particular process of production (see ​Process of
Production​).

Mode of production​ - A mode of production is a particular way in which production is set up

and is defined by its relations of productions (see ​Relations of Production​) and the forces of
production (the relations of people involved in production to their environment; for now, this can
be thought of as the raw materials, the machinery and the scientific and technical knowledge
involved in production, and the labour that ‘sets them into motion’).
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry:
http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Mode_of_Production

Process of production ​- A process of production is the particular process in which production

is carried out. It consists of three elements: the raw materials (self-explanatory), the means of
production (the scientific and technical knowledge, the machinery and so on used to ‘work over’
the raw materials) and labour (concrete work performed by humans).

Production​ - The means by which the material goods necessary for the maintenance of a
‘society’ (see ​Social Formation​) at a given level of development are produced.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Production

Relations of production ​- The relations of production are the relations between classes that
are implied by the particular mode of production (see ​Mode of Production​). Capitalism is a mode
of production that has three classes: capitalists, landlords and workers. Capitalist relations of
production consist in the relations between these three classes.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Production_Relations
Reproduction​ - In dialectical materialism, reproduction refers to the fact that anything that
continues to exist must constantly reproduce itself; since nothing is fixed and static, even
continuing to exist in the same fashion entails a process, which is called reproduction. When
applied to social formations, what this implies is called dual reproduction, which refers to the
way that social formations both reproduce their relations of production (see ​Relations of
Production​) and the physical bodies and minds that are their ‘bearers’.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Reproduction

Science ​- Science is the process by which objective knowledge is produced about some
aspects of material reality. Sciences have a specific object, which refers to the specific level of
organisation of material reality that they study and analyse. There are five sciences, each of
which studies a different type of process, and these are: mathematics, physics, chemistry,
biology and historical materialism.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Science

Specific/Special oppression ​- Capitalism centres around what we call exploitation (which is

defined under the ‘What is capitalism?’ question in the FAQ). Specific/special oppressions refers
to three systems that confer meaningful structural power or material benefits to a person outside
the exploitation which defines relations between classes. There are three of these: racial
supremacy (for our purposes this means white supremacy), patriarchy and ableism.

Social formation ​- A social formation is roughly what is known in liberal ideology as a ‘society’.
It consists of three aspects: ideology (see ​Ideology​), politics (the production and reproduction of
relations of production) and economics (the production of material goods).
Great Soviet Encyclopedia Entry: ​http://greatsovietencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Social_Order

Subject position ​- A structural position is a particular location that a person can occupy within
social relations. A subject position refers to the way in which capitalist ideology ‘hails’ or ‘calls
on’ a particular individual to occupy one of these structural positions.

FAQ

What is capitalism?
Capitalism is a ​mode of production​ based on the appropriation of ​surplus value​ from workers.
What this means is that when a worker labours they produce a certain amount of value which is
equivalent to the ​socially necessary​ labour time (the amount of time that it would take, on
average, for a worker to produce a fixed quantity of that product) that they expended in
producing a particular commodity. A certain portion of that value is returned to the worker in the
form of a ​wage​. The capitalist appropriates the rest of that value as ​surplus value​, which when
taken alongside the effects of competition between capitalists becomes ​profit​. This further
means that a worker is somebody who sells to a capitalist their ​labour power ​(their capacity or
ability to perform labour) in return for a wage. This wage does not represent the total amount of
“actual” ​labour​ that they will have performed but only a portion of it.
What is white supremacy?
White supremacy is an oppressive structure created during the early history of capitalism in
order to justify the expropriation of the land, labour and resources of non-European peoples by
the emerging European colonial powers. In order to do this, the difference between colonizing
Europeans and colonized people has been portrayed as a​ racial ​difference, that is one between
distinct groups with supposedly different inherent capacities, determined by either culture or
biology. In white supremacist societies, access to social resources--political rights and
freedoms, particular economic roles etc..--is determined along ‘racial’ lines. A crucial aspect of
white supremacy is the allocation of material and ideological benefits to European-descended
workers in order to bring them into a ‘racial’ alliance with the capitalists and prevent class-based
unity with racially oppressed workers.

What is patriarchy?
Patriarchy is a specific oppression that guarantees what we call the ​dual reproduction ​of a ​mode
of production​. This involves the reproduction of the ​relations of production ​(the economic
relations between ​classes​, or social groups that have different relations to the ​process of
production​; under capitalism, between capitalists and workers, between workers and landlords
and between landlords and capitalists) and of ​population​ (that is, the physical human bodies
and minds that become ​bearers ​for these relations). The major way in which this filters through
into the component oppressions of patriarchy (listed further on) is that women perform the
majority of ​reproductive labour​ (labour that reproduces relations of production and labourers) in
the form of ​domestic labour ​(‘housework’) and ​sex work​. Patriarchal oppression includes the
specific oppression of several different social groups: ​misogyny ​(the oppression of women),
heterosexism ​(the oppression of non-heterosexuals), ​cissexism ​(the oppression of trans people)
and ​binarism ​(the further oppression of non binary trans people).

What is ableism?
Ableism is a structure pertaining to the oppression of people according to disability or illness. A
disability is defined materially as any state of body or mind that has a tendency to resist the
simplification of a ​labour process​ (in simpler terms, the “averaging” or “flattening” out of a labour
process so that it can be repeated with as little variation as possible). Ableism consists in the
ideological processes and repression that is necessary to minimise the disruption that these
states of body and mind would cause to the ​process of production​ by increasing its complexity.

What is liberalism? What effect does it have on our theory? Why are we opposed to it?
Liberal democracy is one of two forms of bourgeois (capitalists as a ​class​) ​political hegemony
(the way in which a class holds ​state power​), the other being fascism. Liberalism is the ideology
associated with this form of bourgeois class rule. Liberal ideology focuses on ​formal equality
between individuals, that is principles like equality before the law, “freedom of contract” (the
right, supposedly, for workers and capitalists to enter into contracts without state interference)
and so on. Under current conditions, liberalism is a ​hegemonic ​(“dominant”) ideology and it
always has the potential to influence our theory because of this. Liberalism in theory manifests
itself in the use of the individual as a starting point for analysis. In liberal ideology,
social/historical structures are composed of the aggregate of the thoughts and actions of
individuals. However, for materialists it is the structure that precedes the individual and is what
determines the ​subject positions ​that an individual is ‘called on’ to take up and which then
constitute the type of subject that that individual becomes. We are opposed to liberalism as
communists because it represents the ideology of an alien class, the bourgeoisie, as well as
being an ideological contaminant of ​historical materialist ​science in general.

Why is self-determination a good principle with regards to national oppression but not
gender/disability? Why is female/gay/lesbian/trans/disabled separatism incorrect as an
organizational and ideological approach?
The particular conditions which create national oppression - that of national formation linked to
psychological makeup, common economic life, common language and especially common
territory means that the principle of separate organization and self-determination make sense in
nations seeking self-determination - whether this means federation or separation, in the long
term. Gender and disability, however, are not categorized by these criteria but stem in the first
instance from the reproduction process and in the latter from regulation and control of the labour
process. Gender/disability struggles are therefore inseparable from the class struggle within a
given nation, unlike national struggles, which concern a common territory and an independently
articulated economic life. The notion of a separatist society for women, gay/lesbian people,
trans people or disabled people is therefore based in a utopian fantasy that situates these
oppressions in special circumstances independent of class and brushes over the specific
“shape” of national struggle which makes self-determination a correct and vital principle for
communists.

What is bio-essentialism? Why are we opposed to it?

Bio-essentialism is the idea that meaningful social categories like race, gender and disability are
rooted in biology or physiology. This can take different forms where it pertains to different
specific oppressions​. In the area of white supremacy and racism, this takes the form of what we
call ​race science​. This is the proposal that there is such a thing as a ‘biological race’ and that
human populations can be divided into groups with significantly different ancestry and
physical/mental characteristics and that these groups (‘races’) have extremely clear and
well-defined boundaries. In the area of patriarchy, this takes the form of ​sexual dimorphism
theory or the idea that humans can be divided into two completely distinct sexes (‘male’ and
‘female’) and that the social category of ​gender ​(man or woman)​ ​rigidly corresponds to these.
Where ableism is concerned, this takes the form of what we call ​medicalisation​, which is the
idea that disability consists in a set of medically defined, easily classified syndromes and
diseases that do not vary in different social conditions. It is the proposition that the definition of
disability is to be determined by the science of medicine or physiology rather than by a historical
materialist analysis of what social relations constitute the categories of ​abled ​and ​disabled​.
Bio-essentialism is a form of what we call ​mechanical materialism​. This means that the
categories we use to analyse social processes are fixed (because they are rooted in biological
processes) and that they merely change their positions relative to one another. For example in
the context of ableism, some people will always be ​abled ​and others ​disabled​ regardless of
what social relations they are ‘caught up in’ and that disabled liberation consists in shifting the
position of disabled people so that it is equal to that of abled people. ​Dialectical materialism​, our
method, however holds that disabled liberation would consist in the abolition of all distinctions
by ​ability ​as all people, whatever state of body or mind they possess, are able to participate
equally in society and in social production. At this point, whether a person had one arm or two
would be about as meaningful a distinction as whether someone has green or blue eyes.

Why are we opposed to transmedicalism?

Transmedicalism reduces being transgender to the presence or absence of a ‘disease’ called
Gender Identity Disorder (GID), which is characterised by gender dysphoria, a feeling of unease
or dissatisfaction with one’s assigned gender, and a desire to remedy this dysphoria by
transitioning to live as the ‘opposite’ gender. Transmedicalism reduces being trans to the
presence or absence of gender dysphoria, leading to the conclusion that if transition (this is the
intention of transition as a ‘treatment’ for GID) reduces or completely gets rid of a trans person’s
dysphoria, they are no longer trans. This is a form of ​objective idealism​, whereby a particular
social group (in this case, trans people) is defined not by its material relations to other social
groups (cis people) but by the presence or absence of ideas or states of mind (gender
dysphoria).

What is bourgeois ‘transfeminism’ and how do we align ourselves towards it?

Bourgeois transfeminism is the form that the struggle for trans people’s ​democratic rights​ takes
among bourgeois trans people. One way or another it remains within the ​liberal problematic​, or
liberal way of framing thinking (see What is liberalism?).

Some bourgeois transfeminists make a direct compromise with capitalist patriarchy and try to
extract very limited concessions from it. These are the liberal transfeminists and their ideology
tends to focus on the sex/gender distinction and the collapsing of the concepts ​gender ​and
gender identity ​into one another.

Other bourgeois transfeminists oppose themselves radically to capitalist patriarchy and orient
themselves towards the complete abolition of ​cissexism ​within the bourgeois class. However,
being bourgeois they have a stake in the reproduction of capitalism and hence with preserving
patriarchal oppression which also reproduces their privileged class position as bourgeois trans
people. They, therefore, make a compromise with capitalist patriarchy and they do this by
excluding a particular group of people fighting for their ​democratic rights​. The major statement
of this kind of ideology is found in the work of Julia Serano, but popular online “discourses” such
as baeddelism and transmisogyny-exempt/constrained theory also fall into this category. Each
of these excludes non binary trans people from the struggle for democratic rights. These
theories conceive of all transgender people exclusively in terms of a masculine vs. feminine
binary, independent of the actual, complex patriarchal standards for gender that can be
threatened without going in the ‘direction’ of the ‘opposite gender.’ They are also based on the
liberal understanding of oppression where the individual precedes the structure, as opposed to
the materialist view where the structure (in this case, patriarchy and its component oppressions)
precedes the individual.

Marxist-Leninists will support bourgeois transfeminists in the winning of their democratic rights
(such as being able to transition between genders on official documents at request) but insist on
it being our right and responsibility to organise and propagandise among working class trans
people and to lead the ​entire​ working class in political support of trans democratic rights. Under
no circumstances will we accept political leadership from bourgeois transfeminists.

How do we understand the concept of ‘passing’? Why do we reject the notion of ‘passing
privilege’?
‘Passing’ refers to the way in which a member of an oppressed group can ‘pass’ as a member
of the oppressing group, that is be seen and treated as a member of that oppressing group. This
can apply to disability, to gender or to race. ‘Passing’ does refer to a dynamic in ​structural
oppressions​ that we recognise to exist. For example, a trans woman can ‘pass’ as a cis woman
if she is able to ‘conceal’ her birth assignment and be understood and treated as if she had
been assigned female at birth. However, we reject the idea of ‘passing privilege’ for two
reasons. The first is that it represents a form of ​subjective idealism​. This might appear to be
objective but in fact it just inverts the subjectivisation. Instead of saying “I see myself as a
woman”, one’s position in a particular structure becomes dependent on whether other people
say “I see you as a woman”. In each case, a person’s gender is not determined by their
objective​ position in a structure but by the perceptions of another person, which can change
from moment to moment and from person to person. The second is that ‘passing’ does not
confer on the oppressed person any form of ‘privilege’. A ‘passing’ trans woman is constantly
afraid that others will ‘find out’ her assigned sex and that if they do she will lose her
employment, her housing, her friends or her partner or that she will be beaten or killed. The
word ‘passing’ does describe a meaningful dynamic that determines, to an extent, the ​way ​that
trans people will experience transantagonism/transmisogyny but ​all ​trans people are oppressed
by ​some ​type of transantagonism.

If materialist feminists reject liberal individualism, what approach do we take instead?

Instead of trying to determine whether any particular individual is a man, a woman or neither
(based on how one is ‘read’ by others or by how one identifies oneself), materialist feminism
focuses on structures that oppress ​groups​ of people. We do not try to determine whether and
how any individual trans person is treated in accordance with their identified gender, their
assigned gender or their perceived gender, but try to describe the way that patriarchal
structures oppress groups of trans people and how the ​structural positions ​(what we will, in
other contexts, call ​subject positions​) that they occupy ​as groups ​differ from one another. For
example, we can say that there is a structure called ​transantagonism ​that oppresses all trans
people and also many other ​gender non-conforming ​people, but that there is a further structure
that oppresses trans women specifically that we call ​transmisogyny​. From this we determine
how these groups will behave as groups, how we orientate to them and how best we organise
and propagandise among them to weld them into a united force against capitalism.

Why do we critique intersectionality? What do we use in its place?

Intersectionality, as it is commonly understood, proposes that there are several different
oppressions that ‘intersect’ with one another to produce ‘dual’ oppressions that reinforce and
condition one another. For example, transmisogyny would represent the intersection of
transantagonism and misogyny while misogynoir would represent the intersection of misogyny
and anti-black racism. The reason we reject intersectionality is because we do not see
oppressions as being independent from one another or from capitalism as a whole. We see all
oppressions as being necessary aspects of the capitalist mode of production and as being
determined, ​in the last instance​, by the needs of capital in its struggle against the workers and
other exploited classes (for example, peasants). We refer to this as a ​structure-in-dominance
where the phenomenon of class exploitation and the need of capitalists to exploit workers acts,
in the last instance, as a force that ‘drags’ along the ​specific oppressions ​with it. However, each
specific oppression ​has a ​relative autonomy ​from class exploitation. This means that they have
a degree of independence from the struggle of capital to exploit workers under the conditions it
finds most favourable and they develop, to an extent, according to their own speed, rhythm and
tempo. Materialist feminists will sometimes refer to the ​fusion ​of specific oppressions and class
exploitation and we use this to imply that these oppressions are not separate from one another
or from exploitation, but that they do interact and condition one another to produce ‘compound’
oppressions like those that affect women of colour or disabled women, for example.

How are children and young people oppressed? How does this relate to patriarchy?
Children and young people’s oppression relates to the need of capital to replace labour power
(which has its ​bearers​ in the physical bodies of workers) ​generationally​. Since oppression that
pertains to ​dual reproduction ​is considered patriarchal, children’s oppression forms an aspect of
patriarchy, but it differs from all other forms of patriarchal oppression insofar as it does not
concern the production and maintenance of a ​gendered division of labour​, but a ​division of
labour ​by age.

In order for the exploitation of the working class to continue, as one generation of workers dies
or becomes too old to work, they must be replaced by another. However, children do not come
into the world able to participate in production. To reach the point where children can labour two
things must occur: they must form a sense of themselves as a particular kind of ​subject​ (for
example: as a worker, as a woman, as a disabled person) and they must be educated to a
specific level of skill which is ​socially necessary f​ or them to be able to labour (the specific ‘skill
type’ will vary from person to person as say one child learns to be a plumber whilst another
learns to be a librarian; capital is concerned with a ​general ​level of education which allows a
labourer to function in ​any ​labour process and this general education includes things like
reading, writing, arithmetic, basic scientific knowledge, practical and technical skills).
Children come into the world completely dependent on adults at least until they are able to be
weaned. Capital can extend or contract this ​period of dependence ​depending on the extent to
which it requires an average worker to be educated and for how long it needs this period of
education to go on for. Children are not permitted to sell their labour power under bourgeois law
(this is an abstract schema; many children do work) so that they spend their time instead being
schooled and raised to a level of technical skill which is suited to the bourgeoisie's need. Since
capitalism requires that any non-working person be dependent upon a working person’s wage,
this places children in a position of dependence upon their parents or other adults who care for
them. It is this dependence which constitutes the basis for children’s oppression.

What is bourgeois science? How do we approach it?

Bourgeois sciences are those that the bourgeoisie controls the ​means of scientific production
for. These are four: mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology. The bourgeoisie controls
funding and supply for the research labs, field work and so on that constitute the scientific
methods for these four sciences. The bourgeoisie rejects the science of ​historical materialism​,
the science we practice and that we are applying to the study of patriarchal oppression,
because it exposes the exploitation and oppression on which bourgeois class rule depends.
However, the bourgeoisie maintains control of the other four sciences so that they can be used
in the development of ​technique​, which it feeds into the process of production. The fact that
these sciences are controlled, mostly, by the bourgeoisie means that their findings must not be
allowed to threaten the bourgeois class’ rule. This means that they come under distortion from
liberal (or fascist) ideology and their ​scientificity ​is impinged. An example of how bourgeois
science is distorted by liberal ideology is what we call ​neurosexism​. This is the idea that men
and women correspond with the ‘sexes’, ‘male’ and ‘female’, and that ‘male brains’ and ‘female
brains’ differ from one another in such a way as to produce behaviour that corresponds to the
tasks that the bourgeoisie designates to men and women respectively in the ​gendered division
of labour ​(as well as cultural tropes and personality styles associated with these which we call
masculinity ​and ​femininity​). This is biological science being ‘twisted’ to serve the purpose of
reinforcing capitalist patriarchal ideology.

What is dialectical materialism? How do we use this philosophy to understand the world?
Dialectical materialism is the philosophy we use to guide our scientific work in ​historical
materialism​. When we do scientific work in historical materialism, we ‘work over’ liberal ideology
using particular methods that we have developed previously and from this we produce Theory,
or scientific accounts of historical processes. ​Dialectical materialism​ is what guarantees the
scientificity ​of our work and what allows us to know that what we are producing is ​science ​and
not ​ideology​. As a philosophy, dialectical materialism consists of two fundamental components.
The first is ​materialism​, the principle that the material determines the ideal, that ‘matter’
determines ‘mind’. In terms of historical processes, this is expressed in the form that ​social
being ​determines ​social consciousness​, or that the actual position we take up participating in
the world determines what we think. Our consciousness does have a certain effect on our being
insofar as what we think affects how we act but our being is determinative ​in the last instance​; it
drags along the ideas we possess about the world and our lives along with it, although these
ideas have a ​limited autonomy​ of their own. The second aspect is ​dialectics,​ and this consists in
the principle that everything is constantly in a state of movement and change. Everything is
constantly developing; some things are coming into existence and some things are going out.
Change can occur in ​quantity ​(changes in number, frequency or magnitude) or in ​quality
(changes in ‘sort’, ‘kind’ or ‘type’). Dialectical materialism is extremely complex as a philosophy
and has many categories for use in analysis besides those laid out here, but this provides a
rough sketch of its outline.

Further Reading

Materialist or Marxist feminism follows in a long tradition of Marxist-Leninist theorising on the

oppression of women, from the great communists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries (such
as ​Alexandra Kollontai​, ​Clara Zetkin​ and ​Vladimir Lenin​) through to Marxist feminist militants
and scholars of our own time (such as ​Angela Davis​, ​Silvia Federici​ and ​Leslie Feinberg​). Our
current work in developing materialist feminism, despite building on the work of these
theoreticians, derives its method and structure from the book ​Marxism and the Oppression of
Women​, in which ​Lise Vogel​ formulates a materialist critique of radical and socialist feminism.
Below is a selection of important but short and easy-to-read texts from materialist/Marxist
feminists and Marxist-Leninists writing on the subject of the oppression of women, queer and
trans people:

Communism and the Family ​by Alexandra Kollontai

https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1920/communism-family.htm
Only in Conjunction with the Proletarian Woman Will Socialism Be Victorious ​by Clara Zetkin
https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1896/10/women.htm
Women’s Liberation is a Component Part of the Proletarian Revolution ​by Hsu Kwang
https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/peking-review/1974/PR1974-10b.htm
‘The Right to Divorce’ ​from ​A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism ​by V. I. Lenin
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/subject/women/abstract/16_08.htm
Left-Wing Anti-Feminism: A Revisionist Disorder ​by Marlene Dixon
https://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/dixon-marlene/anti-feminism.htm
The Women’s Liberation and Gay Liberation Movements ​by Huey P. Newton
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/newtonq.html
Transgender Liberation ​by Leslie Feinberg
http://bookzz.org/book/2598121/779600